ArticleVisual cognition2021
Semantic generalization of punishment-related attentional priority.
Article in Visual cognition, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Generalisation of value-based attentional priority is category-specific.Quarterly journal of experimental psychology (2006) · 2023Article
- Loss aversion in the control of attention.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2023Article
- Cross-modal generalization of value-based attentional priority.Attention, perception & psychophysics · 2022Article
- The past, present, and future of selection history.Neuroscience and biobehavioral reviews · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The present study aimed to determine whether attentional prioritization of visual stimuli associated with punishment transfers across conceptual knowledge independently of physical features. Participants performed a Stroop task in which words were presented individually. These stimuli consisted of four pairs of synonyms selected such that the two words of each pair have both a strong semantic association and no perceptual similarity. In the learning phase, two words (from two different pairs) were associated with shock independently of performance; all the other words were never paired with shock. In the subsequent test phase, no shock was delivered. Results are consistent with semantic generalization of punishment-related attentional priority; synonyms of words paired with shock produced a Stroop interference effect (i.e., slower response times) in learning and test phases, relative to synonyms of words not paired with shock, suggesting they were prioritized by attention.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.